In a disturbing update shared on X, the official account for 70-year-old Gold Star mother Tina Peters announced that she has been transferred to solitary confinement in the Colorado prison where she has been held for the past year.
According to the post, Peters filed a grievance after a prison teacher allegedly told inmates that Peters “was never going to leave prison” and that the state would “never let her out.” When Peters confronted the teacher in the hallway, the teacher and several inmates reportedly began “antagonizing” her and “ganging up on her verbally.”
UPDATE ON TINA PETERS:
Tina has been moved to solitary confinement today after filing a grievance with the warden about a teacher in the prison making statements to numerous other inmates about her.
Some of those inmates informed Tina that this teacher was speaking openly about…— Tina Peters Whistleblower of fallen Navy SEAL (@realtinapeters) November 21, 2025
Colorado Officials Urge Gov. Polis to Block Federal Transfer
At the suggestion of another inmate, Peters filed a grievance. Following that filing, she was taken to the medical unit, strip-searched, and required to meet with the manager of the prison’s mental health facility. She was then informed she would be moved to solitary confinement for up to 17 days due to what officials described as an “internal affairs investigation.”
Although she was allowed to keep her iPad, she currently has no internet access and cannot call her approved contacts or attorneys unless the entire pod is locked down during her call.
Requests to Block Federal Transfer of Peters From Colorado Officials
On November 12th, the federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) sent a letter to the Colorado Department of Corrections requesting that Peters be transferred to a federal custody while her state conviction is under appeal. This request comes in addition to a federal habeas petition filed earlier this year by her attorney, Peter Ticktin, which remains undecided.
The transfer request immediately triggered pushback from Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser and Mesa County District Attorney Dan Rubenstein—the prosecutor in Peters’ case. In a letter to Governor Jared Polis, the two Democrats urged him to deny the transfer, claiming Peters “harmed her local community and the citizens she was elected to serve,” and noting that an “elected Republican official” authorized her prosecution.
They argued that Peters’ actions “put Mesa’s election systems at risk and violated the public’s trust,” referencing her creation of a forensic image of Mesa County’s election system before the Secretary of State’s “Trusted Build.” That image preserved federal and state-mandated election records still within their legal retention period.
The letter further claimed that allowing the transfer could help “aid the unauthorized or illegal release of a convicted felon by the federal government,” referencing comments by federal officials and the President calling for her release.
Read the letter here:
Colorado County Clerks NGO Urges Denial Due to Potential First Amendment Issues
The Colorado County Clerks Association (CCCA), a nonprofit that presents itself as a collective of elected clerks, issued an even more aggressive statement urging denial of the transfer.
The group asserted that Peters was “the one clerk who chose not to follow the law,” accusing her of deliberately violating election security procedures: turning off security cameras, allowing unauthorized individuals into restricted areas, bypassing safeguards, and misrepresenting routine processes as wrongdoing. They argued these actions created security vulnerabilities and cost Mesa County taxpayers millions to replace equipment.
From the CCCA’s letter:
Ms. Peters was the one clerk who chose not to. Her actions were not mistakes or misunderstandings; they were deliberate violations of Colorado law and/or attempts to undermine public trust. Security cameras in restricted election areas were turned off. Unauthorized individuals were brought into secure spaces under falsified credentials. Established safeguards were bypassed, and routine election procedures were misrepresented as evidence of wrongdoing. None of these actions protected her county; instead, they created vulnerabilities where none had existed and forced Mesa County taxpayers to spend millions replacing compromised equipment and responding to the fallout.
However, several of these claims remain disputed:
• Turning off security cameras was not illegal at the time, as was acknowledged during trial. That rule was added following the Trusted Build.
• The “unauthorized individuals” entered under Peters’ supervision, who was then the elected official legally responsible for the county’s voting equipment. Peters has long argued that bringing in additional technical help was necessary because no county employee felt qualified to create the required forensic image.
• The CCCA’s rebuttals rely on an unsigned report with no listed authors, credentials, or technical experts. In contrast, the Mesa Reports—produced by credentialed computer scientists—have not been addressed directly by any named expert.
The Gateway Pundit fact-checked many of the rebuttals in the CCCA’s report. That article can be found here:
First Amendment Concerns Raised
Perhaps the most alarming argument in the CCCA’s letter was its claim that Peters should remain in state custody because she may continue “disseminating false narratives.” The group wrote that Peters’ statements have “fueled harassment, threats, and intimidation” of clerks and warned that transferring her to federal custody could allow her to continue speaking publicly.
This justification amounts to advocating for restrictions on Peters’ First Amendment rights.
Adding to concerns, Peters was prohibited from presenting the Mesa Reports—or the testimony of multiple computer experts—during her trial.
Those experts have stated publicly that the Mesa Reports’ findings are not “debunked” by the DA’s conclusions and the CCCA’s claims. For example, Mesa Report 3’s analysis found that more than 1,000 ballots were scanned in under a minute, a rate that exceeds the mechanical limits of the equipment.
Experts Speak Out
As part of a three-part investigative series on the Peters trial, interviews were conducted with expert witness Mark Cook and retired Air Force Colonel Shawn Smith. Both men, who hold long-standing credentials in computer systems and cybersecurity, unequivocally rejected the findings released by the DA’s office and the CCCA.
They argue that if their evidence had been allowed into trial, it would have significantly undermined the prosecution’s narrative.
Part 1 of the series is already available here.. Part 2 has been released, and Part 3 will publish here on Tuesday with additional analysis of Mesa 3 and commentary on Judge Michael Barrett’s sentencing remarks—which notably criticized Peters for being “privileged” while minimizing the personal losses she endured during the investigation, including the deaths of her son, her husband, and her father.
Part 2:
The post Tina Peters Moved to SOLITARY CONFINEMENT as Colorado Democrats and an NGO Circle the Wagons to Urge Gov. Polis Against Federal Custody Transfer appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.